Search

Aims A difficult cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implantation scenario emerges when no lateral pacing option exists. The aim of this study was to explore the effect of biventricular pacing (BIVP) on vectorcardiographic parameters in patients with a non-lateral left ventricular (LV) lead position. We hypothesized that perimeter and area reduction for both the QRS complex and T-wave would predict acute CRT response. Methods and results Twenty-six patients (14 ischaemic) with a mean age of 63 ± 10 years and standard CRT indication underwent device implantation with continuous LV pressure registration. The LV lead was placed in either an anterior or apical position. Biventricular pacing was performed at a rate 10% above intrinsic rhythm with acute CRT response defined as LV ΔdP/dtmax >10%. Using this criterion 12 patients were identified as acute CRT responders (responders: 16.7 ± 4.8% vs. non-responders: 1.9 ± 5.3%, P

BackgroundPatient-specific left ventricular (LV) lead optimisation strategies with immediate feedback on cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) effectiveness are needed. The purpose of this study was to compare contractility surrogates derived from biventricular lead motion analysis to the peak positive time derivative of LV pressure (dP/dtmax) in patients undergoing CRT implantation.MethodsTwenty-seven patients underwent CRT implantation with continuous haemodynamic monitoring. The right ventricular (RV) lead was placed in apex and a quadripolar LV lead was placed laterally. Biplane fluoroscopy cine films facilitated construction of three-dimensional RV–LV interlead distance waveforms at baseline and under biventricular pacing (BIVP) from which the following contractility surrogates were derived; fractional shortening (FS), time to peak systolic contraction and peak shortening of the interlead distance (negative slope). Acute haemodynamic CRT response was defined as LV ∆dP/dtmax ≥ 10 %.ResultsWe observed a mean increase in dP/dtmax under BIVP (899±205 mm Hg/s vs 777±180 mm Hg/s, pmax, 18 patients were classified as acute CRT responders and nine as non-responders (23.3%±10.6% vs 1.9±5.3%, pConclusionThe baseline RV–LV interlead distance was associated with echocardiographic LV dimensions. In CRT recipients, contractility surrogates derived from the RV–LV interlead distance waveform could not discriminate between acute haemodynamic responders and non-responders.